What the Sith must change

[darthreignus]

Fear does lead to anger, anger that comes because of perceived loss and loss of accomplishment. Anger that is a natural defense against losing something held dear. Any animal will fear anger when it or its loved one is threatened. Sith philosophy begins to break down at the the next stage: hate.
Why must anger lead to hate? True that hate leads to immediate power of body, but that power is only given by surrendering the mind to simple bodily functions. That is not strength, that is slavery. The Sith are slaves to their emotions and as true slaves they serve their emotions and seek to make them more powerful.
The sith philosophy is enslavement just as much as jedi philosophy.
The sith would be more revered and stronger than any jedi if they simply bridled their passions. Passion is needed to be strong, to win, but surrender to passion is madness. Everyone in the history of the world who has ever surrendered to their passions has been left broken. Only those who have used their passions to fulfill righteous and just goals have ever been elated to the thrones of the truly loved and revered. Sometimes they were killed, it's true, but in every case the descendent's of those who killed them have built monuments to their honor.
Fear leads to anger.
Anger leads to justice.
Justice leads to honor.
Honor leads to power.

The sith need to adopt a code of service similar to that of the jedi, but focused instead on bettering the lives of those around them. As they succeed, power will flow to them because of their honor and people would be happy and willing to let them lead. As their influence grows so does their capacity to do good. In the end, they could become like gods, revered and loved because of their righteousness. It takes a commitment to righteousness in order to make this work.
The rule of two must be abolished and apprenticeship to make followers better people must be established.

[Darth Draconis]

Darth Regius, I've got to ask: what exactly do you think being a Sith means? It means something different to everyone, but I can' help but wonder why you seem to be mixing Jedi and Sith Philosophy that leans more towards Jedi Philosophy, so I'd like to know what you think being a Sith means.

And aside from that, the whole "fear leads to anger, anger to hate, etc" isn't really accurate.

[darthreignus]

Being a Sith means to that you are on a quest for personal power. It means that you seek godhood. The sith fail when they seek to coerce people to give them that power. The jedi fail in that they do not want the responsibility and they build up dikes around their emotions that make them ultimately weak. They turn themselves into the pawns of politicians. The Jedi are not free, they enslave themselves with rules that are meant to curb emotion. The majority of the Sith are slaves to their emotions and they wreak havoc and become bitter when the world doesn't obey their selfish demands.
If a Sith will dedicate himself to service and to noble attributes while still using his passions to fuel his abilities he could be unstoppable. He could gain followers who would be partners with him who themselves would build up power. For so long being a sith has been about managing resources and people. To be a jedi for so long has been about managing ones self. To be a Sith must be leadership! Leading of resources and of self. If a sith is afraid to lose his power then he is doomed to lose it. But if a Sith fears the destruction of those who trust him he will find a way to overcome and those who follow him and put their trust in him will help him.

[Marcho Millennius]

The bettering of the lives of others?
Have you not heard of the phrase "Survival of the fittest"
If "others" are unfit to help themselves, then leave them to their fate. In the end they would have no one else to blame for their misfortunes but themselves. Helping them would only bring you down to their pitiful state.

[Empress Palpatine]

A Sith is a person who will decide upon a certain goal. A Sith will do what ever are the best moves to get there. If it means to get nasty, a Sith will do that. If it menas being nice is what achieves the goal, a Sith will do that. Sith are very pragmatic sorts. Life is usually a mixed bag (nasty or nice).

[Darth Vendetus]

Shame Darth Reignus left the forum, he was brilliant. He understood that power corrupted, and it appears that he was concerned with the soul of all during and after life. I think he was right.. it's the coldest accusation to say that people are weak because of situation. Take a look at the world we live in, it appears that rank and file Sith are controlling things everywhere. Millions are suffering, and governments are denying basic human rights to people or are refusing to step up because of fear of losing their power in public opinion.
Reignus was brilliant when it came to the power of trust.. if he's still available I'd want to ask him questions. I agree with Empress Palpatine, the Sith need a goal to thrive and survive. What did Reignus say? He seeks "godhood". To be a god, you need followers. If you dominate, yeah, you'll get faithful followers, and out of them you'll get a rival. If you cultivate those around you, none will be rivals, but seeking to be equals. Jedi see themselves as vaunted servants while Sith seek the role of masters.
Millennius, you're point of view is foolish and naive. It is explained by the fact that you have access to a computer and can actually post things on a website. You're point of view may be very different if you were born in the Darfur region right now. Do you believe it's their fate to be pawns simply because they're weak and thus resigned to their fate? I mean no personal attack, this is a forum, but I want you to see it through a different lens: if you can help someone who can not help himself, you are responsible for that person's fate. That is a trace of godhood in and of itself I would think..but the fact that there is always someone stronger, faster and better than you means that you will ultimately be held accountable for your actions. As a Sith seeking to be the best, perhaps Reignus was referring to moral authority that a person must wield if he is to achieve all his goals.
On the other hand, a Sith must be willing to take the gloves off to face opposition to him. Whimpering and complaining about the other side not playing fair is not the way of the Sith, and never should be! A Sith needs to be willing to strike hard and fast.. or insidiously, as the case may be.. get people to turn on each other and rot out their strength. A word here, a deed there, and a person can have the trust of all those around him. Or the disdain. Palpatine was brilliant, even though he was flawed. Played the benign, trustworthy politician, made friends, even of the Jedi. Rotted out the Republic, played both sides. Completely trusted by the people; his downfall came by living up to those old Sith traditions of domination, of always seeking to crush opposition. If he had instead ruled benignly, without xenophobia and without personal corruption, he would never have had to rule through fear. In the end, he was corrupted internally, not truly the man of love he had made himself out to be. So he fell because corruption simply cannot win out and maintain control.

[Darth Draconis]

I hardly consider domination a Sith Tradition. Perhaps power does corrupt, but is it not a necessity for survival? By that definition we are all corrupt, though that assumes my assumption is correct(who knows, it may not be). One of the problems I have with your (and Reignus') philosophy is that it assumes the only real power is power over others; but I vehemently disagree with that. Why? It may just be because I have a differing perspective than you and Reignus, but I personally place value in the individual and I feel that if you need power over others to feel as if you've reached godhood it is a weakness, and ultimately a detrimate to the Self. Being in control of someone's fate may give me a nice power trip, but what does it really do for me? It might make me feel good, but what good is power over another without power over oneself? Are you assuming that to be a Sith entails being a leader?

[Mrs. Darth Vader]

Both of you have a good point. I take a little of what Darth Draconis says with what Reignus says. You first need control and self mastery then you control the others if your goals are political. Politics requires people to get involved so you must be a good leader and statesman if you wish to succeed politically. What you do as a Sith is determined by the goals that you set for yourself.

[darkladytiamat]

"With great power comes great responsibility." Throughout history we have seen that power does corrupt. What someone takes as power and tries to apply to help others many times end up being corrupted by those that they are trying to help.

"Those that gain power are afraid to lose power." we too have seen this in history and many of us in the community have seen this on other jedi/sith sites as well.

I view power as the ability to adapt to change. For without changing the power grows stagnante and thus a little death insues. But as Darth Draconis has said becareful of what you wish for power. Power can corrupt, power can help, power can do many things, but it all comes down to one thing and one thing only in my view. CHOICE. without choice, power is nothing at all. We choose to seek different forms of power, we choose what power to use and when. Without choice most things in life would be meaningless.

As for what Sith need to change, I have come across a situation in which some Jedi believe that we are the manifestation of movies and that myth should be taken literally. that we are "evil" in all means that we do. I find this laughable at best and in someways does show their ignorance to place belief in that. But I do believe it would be to our advantage to dispel this myth. we are not RPGers but realistic in our approach to the studies of hte darkside.

[Empress Palpatine]

"Good is a point of view"- Palpatine

I remember growing up in the cold war. The news would show Breshnev and the Communist Party higher ups watching as the troops marched past Red Square. They were the "evil empire" and we were the "good guys." I used to listen to Radio Moscow back then. I could get it on the AM band because in Florida we were close enough to Cuba to easily get a broadcast. It was a different point of view. To them we were the "evil empire" who exploited people, picked on minorities, and had extremes of rich and poor. I later read something written by a young Fidel Castro before he came to power. His concerns were about the very poor people in his country. He did not sound like a bad guy at all, but the way he is talked about here in Florida, he has horns and a tail. I read a biography of Lenin. The Tzar impoverished the nation with a long impossible war. His troops were told to fire upon people marching for bread. Lenin's brother was put in prison. The Tzar was much like Marie Antionette who said "let them eat cake." Lenin led the revolution against him. So, from that point of view, the Tzar was evil and Lenin the good guy.

So it is indeed, a point of view.

[reaver]

Dec 27, 2008 23:17:58 GMT -5 Darth Vendetus said:

Shame Darth Reignus left the forum, he was brilliant. He understood that power corrupted, and it appears that he was concerned with the soul of all during and after life. I think he was right.. it's the coldest accusation to say that people are weak because of situation. Take a look at the world we live in, it appears that rank and file Sith are controlling things everywhere. Millions are suffering, and governments are denying basic human rights to people or are refusing to step up because of fear of losing their power in public opinion.
Reignus was brilliant when it came to the power of trust.. if he's still available I'd want to ask him questions. I agree with Empress Palpatine, the Sith need a goal to thrive and survive. What did Reignus say? He seeks "godhood". To be a god, you need followers. If you dominate, yeah, you'll get faithful followers, and out of them you'll get a rival. If you cultivate those around you, none will be rivals, but seeking to be equals. Jedi see themselves as vaunted servants while Sith seek the role of masters.
Millennius, you're point of view is foolish and naive. It is explained by the fact that you have access to a computer and can actually post things on a website. You're point of view may be very different if you were born in the Darfur region right now. Do you believe it's their fate to be pawns simply because they're weak and thus resigned to their fate? I mean no personal attack, this is a forum, but I want you to see it through a different lens: if you can help someone who can not help himself, you are responsible for that person's fate. That is a trace of godhood in and of itself I would think..but the fact that there is always someone stronger, faster and better than you means that you will ultimately be held accountable for your actions. As a Sith seeking to be the best, perhaps Reignus was referring to moral authority that a person must wield if he is to achieve all his goals.
On the other hand, a Sith must be willing to take the gloves off to face opposition to him. Whimpering and complaining about the other side not playing fair is not the way of the Sith, and never should be! A Sith needs to be willing to strike hard and fast.. or insidiously, as the case may be.. get people to turn on each other and rot out their strength. A word here, a deed there, and a person can have the trust of all those around him. Or the disdain. Palpatine was brilliant, even though he was flawed. Played the benign, trustworthy politician, made friends, even of the Jedi. Rotted out the Republic, played both sides. Completely trusted by the people; his downfall came by living up to those old Sith traditions of domination, of always seeking to crush opposition. If he had instead ruled benignly, without xenophobia and without personal corruption, he would never have had to rule through fear. In the end, he was corrupted internally, not truly the man of love he had made himself out to be. So he fell because corruption simply cannot win out and maintain control.

"Do you believe it's their fate to be pawns simply because they're weak and thus resigned to their fate? I mean no personal attack, this is a forum, but I want you to see it through a different lens: if you can help someone who can not help himself, you are responsible for that person's fate."

This I have to disagree with you on. Every individual on the planet has the power to overcome, and those that are being slaughtered everday let others dictate their actions. I am not responsible for someone's life but my own, if I choose to help I will at the most advise on what I think needs to be done, their life is in their hands and only they can change or grow stronger. If they cannot fathom the strength within themselves then they are lost, and eventually will die.